DIALOGIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE

SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE

Erik S. Wright

As leaders find themselves in different situations that call for varied responses to problems or crises,
there are often difficulties in determining how to apply a leadership style to each situation. Similarly,
there are numerous methods of development that can be used to achieve the change or outcome they
seek. This article presents dialogic methods that situational leaders may employ to enact change and
develop the skills and performance of their followers.

SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP
Leadership is a topic of considerable discussion in the
academic and business worlds. It has been a point of
debate and research for quite some time, and there are
a number of quality articles published annually on the
topic (Ardichvili & Manderscheild, 2008). The literature
on servant leadership was first introduced around the be-
ginning of the 20th century and focused significantly on
trait and behavioral theories (Mehta, 2012). Leadership is
one of the most important factors in business, especially
in global environments (Muczyk & Holt, 2008). While
there are a great many leadership theories and styles be-
ing used by businesses, the Hersey–Blanchard Situational
Leadership Model is one of the most commonly used
in large businesses today (Ardichvili & Manderscheild,
2008).
The model was first developed in 1979 by researchers
Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, and it has subsequently
been modified and expanded upon over time (Blanchard
& Hersey, 1996). They argued that there was no right or
wrong leadership style and that it was the attitudes of the
leaders that made a difference (Blanchard & Hersey, 1996).
In addition, they believed that each situation warranted a
response from the leader, and an effective leader would
be able to judge the response needed based on the abil-
ity and willingness of the follower to complete the task
(Pasaribu, 2015; Schermerhorn & Bachrach, 2015). As a
consequence of adjusting one’s leadership style to meet the
followers’ needs, the follower grows and becomes more ca-
pable of completing the tasks required. In this way, lead-
ers can alter their leadership style to fit the follower’s needs
(Schermerhorn & Bachrach, 2015).
Readiness, as discussed by Hersey and Blanchard
(1996), categorized the response by leaders into four quad-
rants: telling, selling, participating, and delegating. Each
of these quadrants was characterized by its relation to
the support required from the leader. For example, the
delegating style works best when the followers are ready,
willing, and able to complete the work (Schermerhorn &
Bachrach, 2015). This allows the leader to delegate the as-
signments needed and to be assured that the followers can
complete the assignments without a great deal of supervi-
sion.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, leaders must
utilize selling when their followers are in fact unable to
complete the tasks but are still ready and willing and confi-
dent that they can do so. For followers requiring high sup-
port with little guidance, participating is an appropriate
method for leaders to use. These individuals are likely able
to do the task but are either unwilling or insecure in their
abilities. Finally, when followers are unable, unwilling, or
insecure in completing a task, the leader must rely on giv-
ing instruction and directing them or telling. “A change
in the leadership behavior of the situational leader is trig-
gered by an improvement in the performance of the fol-
lower as they move along the developmental continuum”
(Lynch, 2015, Conclusion section, para. 1).

Performance Improvement, vol. 56, no. 9, October 2017

© 2017 International Society for Performance Improvement
Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/pfi.21733 27

Adaptability of leaders is
critical to effectively handle the
variety of situations that may
arise, and studies have shown
that superiors, peers, and
subordinates can identify
adaptable leaders and view
that as a positive leadership
trait.
There has been limited research into situational
leadership theory (Ardichvili & Manderscheid, 2008;
Papworth, Milne, & Boak, 2009). In addition, research
that has been completed has often resulted in mixed or
contradictory findings (Cairns, Hollenback, Preziosi, &
Snow, 1998; Mehta, 2012; Papworth et al., 2009; Thomp-
son & Glaso, 2015). Many of the studies that have been
conducted have been critical of the theory while also
recognizing the importance of the theory in human re-
sources development (HRD) (Mehta, 2012). Studies have
also noted that there is support for the theory on a broad
level as supervisors tend to interact less with those who
are more experienced (Papworth et al., 2009). Some con-
tentions as to the effectiveness of studies on the situational
leadership theory stem from the difficulty in assessing
the readiness level of the followers (Thompson & Glaso,
2015) as well as difficulties with measurements, controls,
and study designs (Papworth et al., 2009). Several meth-
ods such as age, years of experience, and education level
have been utilized to assess the readiness level of the
followers, but there have been few findings that these are
true predictors (Thompson & Glaso, 2015). As a result,
the situational leadership model gained attention in early
studies, but the final results have often been mixed (Mehta,
2012).
As noted by Mehta (2012), many studies and re-
searchers have recognized that the situational leadership
theory model has been quite relevant to the training and
human resource development (HRD) fields. The popular-
ity of this model among HRD professionals and trainers
could result from the fact that the model can be easily ap-
plied to a variety of settings, and is relatively easy to under-
stand (Ardichvili & Manderscheid, 2008). The adaptability
of leaders is critical to the effective handling of the variety
of situations that may arise, and studies have shown that
28 www.ispi.org • DOI: 10.1002/pfi • OCTOBER 2017
superiors, peers, and subordinates can identify adaptable
leaders and view that as a positive leadership trait (Silver-
thorne, 2000). Accordingly, the situational leadership style
has become a popular style with many large corporations,
especially those operating on a global scale (Silverthorne,
2000).
Cultural factors undoubtedly play a role in the effective-
ness of any leadership style (Vandayani, Kartini, Hilmiana,
& Azis, 2015) and national culture could potentially be a
predictor of the effectiveness of leadership models in non-
Western countries. Some studies have indicated that the
situational leadership model could be utilized on a global
scale, with applicability to Asian cultures (Silverthorne,
2000). Given the widespread use of the situational lead-
ership model, it is important not only to understand the
basics of that theory but to understand ways to develop
the leaders who are practicing that theory both in West-
ern countries and further abroad.
With an understanding of how situational leadership
theory works, we now focus on the task of establishing
methods to develop the leader’s skills. Any leadership style
can succeed, but the success of a leader can often depend
on a multitude of factors that aren’t always determined by
one’s ability to lead; it could also be determined by the
skills developed by the leader as well as by the leader’s fol-
lowers (Lord & Hall, 2005).
A concern in the HRD field is that there are few gen-
eral models for developing leadership skills, which can
be attributed to a focus on the trait features of leadership
(Lord & Hall, 2005). Recent arguments, however, contend
that it is a mix of behaviors, cognitive abilities, and social
skills that can develop over time and must ultimately re-
sult in the leadership role becoming a part of the leaders’
self-identity (Lord & Hall, 2005). Leadership research, like
many other forms of research, has been influenced by the
periodic fashions in research theory, focusing on traits at
some points as well as cognitions and behaviors at other
times (Chemers, 2000). Leadership development is crucial
for HRD and performance improvement (PI) profession-
als, yet there has been minimal research on the topic of
leadership development (Turner, Chih-Huan, Schroeder,
& Johnson, 2016).
DIALOGIC DEVELOPMENT
Garavan, McGuire, and Lee (2015) developed a typology
for the development of leaders by identifying four types of
development. Their typology identified these four areas of
development depending on how the development unfolds
and to what extent it is pursued: acquisitive, autonomous,
networked, and dialogic.
Acquisitive
The first developmental area is identified as acquisitive,
which comes from a planned opportunity and is un-
dertaken in an independent manner. It is an individual
process of developing knowledge, skill, and behaviors.
This type of development is commonly associated with
expertise development, professional development, en-
hanced competency, self-confidence, and career growth.
Autonomous
The second developmental area is identified as au-
tonomous and is associated with an emergent opportunity
pursued in an independent manner. This development is
focused on the individual and is more identified as devel-
oping the individual rather than developing skills that are
useful to organizations or jobs. With limited research in
this area, it is believed that this type of development is
commonly associated with goal-directed behavior, goal at-
tainment, and self-improvement activities.
Networked
The third developmental function is identified as net-
worked development and is associated with planned de-
velopment opportunities pursued in an interdependent
fashion. This type of development focuses heavily on or-
ganizational and inter-organizational relationships.
Dialogic
The fourth and final developmental function is dialogic
development, characterized by an emergent developmen-
tal situation that is interdependently pursued. This devel-
opmental style involves co-participation, mutual consti-
tution, and sense making. Another view of this style is
that it involves developing coaching and mentoring skills,
decision-making skills, cultivating feedback, and develop-
ing social skills (Turner et al., 2016). While there have been
relatively few studies that have been conducted regard-
ing the dialogic style of leadership development, this style
closely mirrors the abilities necessary to become an effec-
tive leader utilizing the situational leadership theory. As
such, this article focuses on the developmental aspects of
dialogic development as it relates to situational leadership
theory.
Dialogic development is not a new concept to the HRD
or educational fields. To get a true sense of the concept of
dialogic development, one can look at different fields of
study (e.g., organizational development, psychology, and
education) that utilize the dialogic technique quite exten-
sively. The dialogic approach looks at each situation dif-
ferently and is non-symmetrical, focusing on equality in
the relationship more than on the authority of the leader
By utilizing dialogic
developmental tools, leaders
can create an environment
where communication is open,
concerns and thoughts are
expressed freely, and mutual
understanding can become the
norm within any organization.
(Alro & Dahl, 2015b). In the dialogic concept, one per-
son does not always make the decisions or draw conclu-
sions. Dialogic development can be viewed as a container
in which preconceptions, prejudices, and emotions can be
put away, which allows for new ideas and discussion in an
open manner (Alro & Dahl, 2015b).
One of the main concepts behind dialogic development
is communication and the way dialogue can be an impor-
tant part of the leadership experience. The primary func-
tion of dialogic development is not to sway or persuade
others to one point of view but to allow open discussions
and to allow others to express their point of view (Alro &
Dahl, 2015a). Situational leaders have many tools at their
fingertips, one of which is being able to utilize the devel-
opmental techniques available to them through dialogic
development.
SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM
The dialogic method is rooted in the theory of social
constructivism (Busche & Marshak, 2009; Hersted, 2017).
Many dialogic practices assume that organizations are so-
cially constructed with no real way of defining how peo-
ple organize, with no hidden truths regarding organiza-
tions, and with no model determining how organizations
should come into existence (Busche & Marshak, 2009).
Leaders are a part of the system, just as much as the fol-
lowers, as they become a product of the realities that they
co-created (Fairhurst & Connaughton, 2014). The con-
cepts that make a good leader are often shaped by cultural
and environmental factors (Busche & Marshak, 2009). In
addition, leadership can be viewed as being grounded in
social constructivist processes, often using language as a
means for leading. This process can also be described as
relational leading, emphasizing dialogue over monologue
and affording a more communicative relationship within
the leader-follower dyad.
Performance Improvement • Volume 56 • Number 9 • DOI: 10.1002/pfi 29
 Social constructivism theory can be defined as the
knowledge and understanding that occurs when individ-
uals engage in social behavior or dialogue regarding mu-
tual problems or tasks (Driver, Asoko, Leach, Mortimer,
& Scott, 1994). The theory contends that values are not
stable and that each person’s perceptions belong to them-
selves while constantly evolving because of social inter-
actions (Hersted, 2017). Additionally, primarily because
it can easily be transformed into a leader–follower re-
lationship, dialogic methods help to create new images,
stories, texts, narratives, and other socially constructed
realities that can affect how people think and do their jobs
(Busche & Marshak, 2009). This relational leading can ul-
timately result in the leader’s objective of improving per-
formance and completing tasks. Communication or di-
alogue between individuals can also convey trust, care,
sensitivity, and recognition of the uniqueness of the other
person and can lead to mutual understandings and mean-
ing making (Kathard, Pillay, D., & Pillay, M., 2015).
DIALOGIC TOOLS FOR SITUATIONAL
LEADERS
To answer the question of which dialogic methods could
prove useful to those practicing the situational leadership
style, we first introduced a preview of the situational lead-
ership model, dialogic development, and social construc-
tivism theory. For each of the four styles of leadership
in the situational leadership model, specific dialogic de-
velopment tools can also be applied. The primary con-
sideration for the leader is communication and ensuring
that the communication is clear and conducted in part-
nership with the follower. For leaders finding themselves
in the participating situation, this will likely come eas-
ily. Promoting the dialogue by encouraging the sharing
of ideas while using participative discussions will likely
help to lead to a consensus view and allow the followers
to complete their tasks (Schermerhorn & Bachrach, 2015).
Delegating, on the other hand, becomes increasingly diffi-
cult for utilizing dialogic techniques. However, this can be
achieved by providing clear guidance and allowing groups
to make decisions and take action on their own, which is
clearly more hands-off (Schermerhorn & Bachrach, 2015).
The leader can work to create an environment that encour-
ages open discussion among the group’s members, setting
the expectation that the group should make decisions after
deliberating and analyzing (Alro & Dahl, 2015b).
When participating in the selling aspect of situational
leadership, leaders must take full advantage of their com-
munication and dialogic skills to explain the tasks and the
reasons for completing them (Schermerhorn & Bachrach,
2015). Again, through the use of open dialogue, the leader
30 www.ispi.org • DOI: 10.1002/pfi • OCTOBER 2017
should listen to the follower’s concerns and work to arrive
at a mutual understanding of the situation while working
toward the smartest solution to the problem (Alro & Dahl,
2015b). Finally, the situation in which leaders may find
the most difficulty in applying dialogic techniques is in
telling. Telling involves giving specific task direction and
closely supervising the work (Schermerhorn & Bachrach,
2015). While creating an open dialogue may not be natu-
ral or easy, the opportunity exists to engage in a dialogue,
which may begin to lay the groundwork for future situa-
tions where telling may not be the most effective leader-
ship method.
CONCLUSION
The situational leadership style is a very popular leader-
ship concept in businesses in the Western world, and it
has become increasingly so throughout global enterprises.
If leaders or organizations choose to utilize this method,
they should be aware of the strengths of the method as
well as its potential drawbacks. This article has described
the situational leadership model and has shown the need
for the development of those leadership skills. By utiliz-
ing dialogic developmental tools, leaders can create an en-
vironment where communication is open, concerns and
thoughts are expressed freely, and mutual understanding
can become the norm within any organization. A further
understanding of how meaning is developed and socially
constructed will also aid situational leaders in assessing
the readiness of their followers and improving the dia-
logue between all parties.
References
Alro, H., & Dahl, P.N. (2015a). Dialogic feedforward in group
coaching. International Journal of Action Research, 11,
317–338. https://doi.org/10.1688/IJAR-2015-03-Alro
Alro, H., & Dahl, P.N. (2015b). Dialogic group
coaching—inspiration from transformative meditation.
Journal of Workplace Learning, 27, 501–513.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JWL-10-2014-0073
Ardichvili, A., & Manderscheid, S. (2008). Emerging
practices in leadership development: An introduction.
Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10, 619–631.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422308321718
Blanchard, K., & Hersey, P. (1996). Great ideas revisited.
Training & Development, 50(1), 42–47. Retrieved from
http://www.td.org
Busche, G., & Marshak, R. (2009). Revisioning organization
development: Diagnostic and dialogic premises and patterns of
practice. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 45, 348–368.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886309335070
Cairns, T., Hollenback, J., Preziosi, R., & Snow, W. (1998).
Technical note: A study of Hersey and Blanchard’s
situational leadership theory. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 19(2), 113–116.
https://doi.org/10.1108/01437739810208692
Chemers, M. (2000). Leadership research and theory: A
functional integration. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and
Practice, 4, 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1037//1089-2699.4.1.27
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P.
(1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the
classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X023007005
Fairhurst, G., & Connaughton, S. (2014). Leadership: A
communicative perspective. Leadership, 10, 7–35.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715013509396
Garavan, T.N., McGuire, D., & Lee, M. (2015). Reclaiming
the “D” in HRD: A typology of development
conceptualizations, antecedents, and outcomes. Human
Resource Development Review, 14, 359–388.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484315607053
Hersted, L. (2017). Reflective role-playing in the development
of dialogic skill. Journal of Transformative Education, 15,
137–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344616686765
Kathard, H., Pillay, D., & Pillay, M. (2015). A study of
teacher-learner interactions: A continuum between
monologic and dialogic interactions. Language, Speech &
Hearing Services in Schools (Online), 46, 222–241.
https://doi.org/10.1044/2015_LSHSS-14-0022
Lord, R.G., & Hall, R.J. (2005). Identity, deep structure and the
development of leadership skill. The Leadership Quarterly, 16,
591–615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.06.003
Lynch, B. (2015). Partnering for performance in situational
leadership: A person-centered leadership approach.
International Practice Development Journal, 5(p1), 1–10.
Retrieved from http://www.fons.org
ERIK S. WRIGHT, MBA, is an adjunct professor of management at Missouri Southern State University in
Joplin, MO, as well as a PhD student at the University of North Texas in Denton, TX, and a human resources
professional and consultant. Specializing in performance improvement and human resource development,
he has more than 10 years of experience in leadership development and training within business environ-
ments ranging from small companies to large corporations. He may be reached at wright-e@mssu.edu
Mehta, M. (2012). Situational leadership and personal
effectiveness: Managers in Indian development
organizations. Abhigyan, 30, 23–34. Retrieved from
http://www.fsm.ac.in/pub_abhigyan.html
Muczyk, J., & Holt, D. (2008). Toward a cultural
contingency model of leadership. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 14, 277–286.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051808315551
Papworth, M., Milne, D., & Boak, G. (2009). An exploratory
content analysis of situational leadership. Journal of
Management Development, 28, 593–606.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02621710910972706
Pasaribu, F. (2015). The situational leadership behavior,
organizational culture and human resources
management strategy in increasing productivity of private
training institutions. Information Management and
Business Review, 7(3), 65–79. Retrieved from
https://ifrnd.org/journal/index.php/imbr/article/view/1155
Schermerhorn, J., & Bachrach, D. (2015). Management (13th
ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Silverthorne, C. (2000). Situational leadership theory in
Taiwan: A different culture perspective. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 21, 68–74.
https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730010318156
Thompson, G., & Glaso, L. (2015). Situational leadership
theory: A test from three perspectives. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 36, 527–544.
https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-10-2013-0130
Turner, J.R., Chih-Huan, C., Schroeder, J., & Johnson, K.
(2016). The leadership development spectrum: An integrative
literature review and typology. Manuscript submitted for
publication.
Vandayani, P., Kartini, D., Hilmiana, H., & Azis, Y. (2015). The
impact of national culture on effectiveness of situational
leadership Hersey–Blanchard. International Journal of Scientific
& Technology Research, 4(7), 78–82. Retrieved from
http://www.ijstr.org
Performance Improvement • Volume 56 • Number 9 • DOI: 10.1002/pfi 31
Copyright of Performance Improvement is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.